Lost Thought 00:Biological Ali: Information can only be compressed so much before vital content starts getting lost. If you put the sentiment you outlined under some scrutiny, you may find that you're really speaking to a problem with the audience, not the speech itself.

This may be true, but you can't change the audience. If the speech doesn't fit the audience, that's a problem with the speaker.

The president just outlined his record, and therefore his campaign strategy, to the farking press. And the presses reaction is that his record is too long and complicated and can't you just tell the American people that Romney's mormonism is a problem or something so we can write a quicky article and get paaaaid.

Sabyen91:Kevin72: Hobodeluxe: I swear I just saw an ABC news piece by Jake Tapper on both men's speeches today and Fox News couldn't have done a better job for Romney. Totally negative to Obama and totally positive for Romney.

The MSM bias is pro-horserace, anti-runaway. To stay "relevant" even when they are not. It's a more subtle kind of attention-trolling than outright attention-whoring.

Fox is interested in a horserace? I agree with most outlets but Fox is a major part of the MSM.

No. Fox News is not interested in a horserace. And Fox News is NOT mainstream news. It is a propaganda arm of the Republican Party. Notice that the geniuses who call the MSM the "Lamestream Media" DO NOT consider Fox News to be "lamestream".

Kevin72:Hobodeluxe: I swear I just saw an ABC news piece by Jake Tapper on both men's speeches today and Fox News couldn't have done a better job for Romney. Totally negative to Obama and totally positive for Romney.

The MSM bias is pro-horserace, anti-runaway. To stay "relevant" even when they are not. It's a more subtle kind of attention-trolling than outright attention-whoring.

Fox is interested in a horserace? I agree with most outlets but Fox is a major part of the MSM.

Hobodeluxe:I swear I just saw an ABC news piece by Jake Tapper on both men's speeches today and Fox News couldn't have done a better job for Romney. Totally negative to Obama and totally positive for Romney.

The MSM bias is pro-horserace, anti-runaway. To stay "relevant" even when they are not. It's a more subtle kind of attention-trolling than outright attention-whoring.

Actually, if he DID sing "My Girl" at campaign appearances, his numbers would skyrocket. Democrats vote with their hearts. If he did a stunt singing a verse or two to Michelle while acting totally in love, the only women that would vote against him would be rock-ribbed Republican Ladies-Against-Women.

TheShavingofOccam123:Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Hey farkhead. You remember my policy. Until you start citing your own posts you can go fark yourself. You cite nothing. Don't expect me to do your work. You can easily go Google 2008 media studies for the candidate or 2004 or 96 studies for the incumbent coverage.

GAT_00:violentsalvation: cameroncrazy1984: violentsalvation: Yeah people like Alter are bending the truth for the right. whatever, farkers.

He's a victim of the same mentality as the others. If Obama makes a good speech and Romney does something stupid like have his campaign bus drive around the venue honking, they don't have a story.

They all came across with the same basic statement, and it has nothing to do with Romney. The speech was too long, it had little or no new material, it was not good for soundbites or invigorating anyone, it was only good background noise during a cat-nap.

I haven't heard it myself, and I don't plan to. But it is entirely possible that Obama and/or the speechwriters were off and the speech did not equal what it was touted to be. THere isn't any bias here, IMHO.

Except that every single network has been statistically shown to be harsher on the President than any Republican.

Start here and advance. Every single Republican candidate had at least one period where the media was more positive than negative in regards to them. Obama never has.

God you are dumb. Let me put this simply... THE PRESIDENT ALWAYS RECEIVES HARSHER TREATMENT. They are responsible for more, they have more policy to criticize. Stop with your idiocy. Compare Obama coverage to 04 bush. Seriously you are dumb. The media didn't even investigate Obama dedicating his yearbook page to his dealer as a candidate, yet we all know how evil Ann romney is for riding horses. Grow up.